Opportunistic or Non-Random Wildlife Crime? Attractiveness Rather Than Abundance in the Wild Leads to Selective Parrot Poaching

Abstract

Illegal wildlife trade, which mostly focuses on high-demand species, constitutes a major threat to biodiversity. However, whether poaching is an opportunistic crime within high-demand taxa such as parrots (i.e., harvesting proportional to species availability in the wild), or is selectively focused on particular, more desirable species, is still under debate. Answering this question has important conservation implications because selective poaching can lead to the extinction of some species through overharvesting. However, the challenges of estimating species abundances in the wild have hampered studies on this subject. We conducted a large-scale survey in Colombia to simultaneously estimate the relative abundance of wild parrots through roadside surveys (recording 10811 individuals from 25 species across 2221 km surveyed) and as household, illegally trapped pets in 282 sampled villages (1179 individuals from 21 species). We used for the first time a selectivity index to test selection on poaching. Results demonstrated that poaching is not opportunistic, but positively selects species based on their attractiveness, defined as a function of species size, coloration, and ability to talk, which is also reflected in their local prices. Our methodological approach, which shows how selection increases the conservation impacts of poaching for parrots, can be applied to other taxa also impacted by harvesting for trade or other purposes.

Parrot Ownership and Capture in Coastal Ecuador: Developing a Trapping Pressure Index

“…This is similar to Costa Rica, where 18% of households owned a pet parrot in 2001 [9]. Our current ownership questions focused on just one species, so we expect the level of current ownership of all parrot species to be much higher and similar to Colombia where 58% of all people had pet parrots [10]. Current ownership and reports of Lilacine trapping in the last three years varied between communities, with 0% to 50% and 0% to 26%, respectively.…”

“…Understanding whether taking parrots from the wild is opportunistic or selective is important because selective capture can lead to the extinction of species through overharvesting [10]. Our results suggest that trapping is selective given the differences in the popularity of species, with some kept in 20 communities and some in none.…”

“…Amazon parrots and macaws are preferred due to their attractiveness and ability to mimic the human voice [8]; this is illustrated in Costa Rica, where nearly 20% of households have a pet parrot and half of these are Amazona species [9]. Consequently, the rate at which Amazon parrots and macaws are trapped is much higher than expected considering their availability in the wild [10].…”

When does agriculture enter into conflict with wildlife? A global assessment of parrot–agriculture conflicts and their conservation effects

“…Moreover, the persecution of large parrots as crop pests may be synergistically enhanced by other exploitation uses where size matters, such as their capture for their use as pets or hunting for food. Large parrot species, which usually are more attractive and better at imitating human speech, are preferred across cultures as pets (Romero‐Vidal et al., 2020; Tella & Hiraldo, 2014). For example, red‐fronted macaws ( Ara rubrogenys ) are killed as crop pests but also live‐trapped in corn crops for the pet market in Bolivia (Tella et al., 2013), and vasa parrots ( Coracopsis vasa ) are heavily persecuted as crop pests, hunted for food and also captured for the caged bird trade in Madagascar (Martin et al., 2014).…”

“…Likewise, the consequences of persecution on population decrease and extinction risk may be higher in harsher environments and in human‐dominated landscapes (Di Marco et al., 2018). Some species traits, such as large body size, make species more conspicuous and attract human attention (Frynta et al., 2010; Romero‐Vidal et al., 2020), which we believe may also enhance their persecution by farmers. Finally, we expected higher risk of persecution and extinction for species with geographical ranges located in regions with low level of environmental protection (UNEP‐WCMC & IUCN, 2019).…”